Jesus is not God Almighty Himself

[Thinking Homer]

Thanks

I don't currently associate with any particular denomination. I spent the most time with the Church of the Nazarene growing up. In fact, about 14 years ago or so, back when I was in high school, my theology would have been nearly identical to your own now. That was when I was just starting to get into really studying and debating theology. I started off defending the Trinity. However, it didn't take me long to realize that I wasn't really equipped to defend the Trinity to even myself - let alone others. Thus I began to study everything pro-Trinity I could find to make sense of it and the scriptural arguments in support of it. After a significant period of study and debate I eventually had to admit to myself that the scriptural evidence for the Trinity is - at best - lacking, and at worse all of these churches are just flat out wrong. At the time the latter might have seemed improbable - but one of the sad truths of the modern church is that virtually no one studies these matters beyond learning proof texts to defend their preconceived views.

Then I turned my attention to the study of the Church Fathers. Everyone always insisted that the Church has always, since its inception, been Trinitarian. I figured that even if I didn't see it taught in scripture, if the Church Fathers all testified to it - then that maybe a sufficient witness to defend it. I bought myself the Ante-Nicene Fathers Series and spent many years reading through the writings of these Church Fathers. However, what I found is that the Church Fathers were anything but Trinitarians. Even the earliest Trinitarians, like Tertullian, maintained that Jesus was begotten - that there was a time when the Son did not exist, when God was not the Father. And if you look at earlier influential Church Fathers like Justin Martyr - he explicitly says that Jesus is a second, lesser god.

As such, finding no basis for the Trinity in scripture or in history, I rejected the Trinity. Then began the on-going process of re-evaluating the scripture under this new light.

Oh I see. The main reason why mainstream Christianity accept the Trinity is that it becomes very complicated if we don't place Jesus into the boundaries which we define as God. I have already given you the polytheistic argument. You claim that Christ does not demand worship, but clearly that is not the case according to Scripture, which obviously becomes a problem.

You place Christ below the Father, and define Him as the Son of God which I also agree with. The problem for you is what to do with this entity known as the Son of God. You clearly believe in Him, you don't worship Him, you do not see Him as God Almighty. So what is Jesus to you exactly? Clearly He is the mediator between us and God, but do you just see Him as some kind of mechanism, or thing?

Btw I will get back to answering the points you raised earlier.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So what are you then? Clearly you've been studying the Bible extensively...

Thanks for the (sort of backhanded) compliment.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

But this is false, because the bible itself talks of many messiahs. Even a Persian king could be considered one. We have to remember not to take claims at face value. They must be supported and many simply aren't.

You’re right...even in Judges, referring to the Israelites, it says “God raised up saviors for them.” (Like Gideon, Samson, Ehud, etc.)

But I’m sure you realize, we’re speaking of saving from...death caused by sin (Romans 5:12) John 3:16.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

So what is Jesus to you exactly? Clearly He is the mediator between us and God, but do you just see Him as some kind of mechanism, or thing?

He is our Savior, sent by Jehovah God. John 3:16(What if God hadn’t sent him?)

He’s also our King, again because God made him such.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

Jesus gives Peter the keys to the kingdom, so to speak, despite having called him "Satan" and Peter being characterized as an arrogant coward in canon AND non-canon texts. The only one who thinks Peter is a great guy is Peter.

yeah, he had some issues, didn’t he? (Helps us to see that Jesus (and God, since Jesus is the image of God) looks for the good in us, and doesn’t dwell on the bad.

But keep in mind...when Peter denied Jesus near the end, well, at least he did stay around; the other Apostles had completely fled!

 

[Desert Snake]

Did you read the article? Men are called God. Does this mean they are God almighty?

Then why are you using a name for your deity, that could mean anything?
Your argument makes it, that everytime you use God, as a name, it is vague. You could mean, satan, or Ba'al Ashtoreth, or a person, who knows.

Aside from the blatant contradiction, of your arguement, saying that satan, or a person, could be god, yet Jesus can't be god.
Your argument makes no sense, and you aren't even following it.

 

[Hockeycowboy]

If they were equals, then they would simply have different names.

Yes, like maybe the term 'brothers'. I mean, if they're equal.
But the Bible never says that.

Now, Jesus has brothers...but God doesn't.

 

[nPeace]

Then why are you using a name for your deity, that could mean anything?
Your argument makes it, that everytime you use God, as a name, it is vague. You could mean, satan, or Ba'al Ashtoreth, or a person, who knows.

Aside from the blatant contradiction, of your arguement, saying that satan, or a person, could be god, yet Jesus can't be god.
Your argument makes no sense, and you aren't even following it.

Not me.
The Bible is what uses the word God. I am using the Bible. Are you denying that you use the Bible, or are you saying God should not be used.

Are you following this conversation? Where did I say that

saying that satan, or a person, could be god, yet Jesus can't be god.

Show me where.

 

[Desert Snake]

Not me.
The Bible is what uses the word God. I am using the Bible. Are you denying that you use the Bible, or are you saying God should not be used.

Are you following this conversation? Where did I say that
Show me where.

Your argument is that the name God, can't be used, to mean anything specific.
Your argument literally makes no sense, and makes it so that everytime you use the name God, it can mean anything.

This has nothing to do with how I use the name God, since I actually use it in the manner, that the Bible does. Which you don't understand.

 

[nPeace]

Your argument is that the name God, can't be used, to mean anything specific.
Your argument literally makes no sense, and makes it so that everytime you use the name God, it can mean anything.

This has nothing to do with how I use the name God, since I actually use it in the manner, that the Bible does. Which you don't understand.

My argument is not what you say at all.
What is the name of God? It is not God.
Where did I say that the term God means anything? I didn't.
If you are saying, where the word God is used, it cannot be determined who it refers to, that is false, since the surrounding texts says who it refers to.

For example -
Exodus 7:1 Moses - a man.
Acts 12:22 Herod - a man
Acts 28:6 Paul - a man
John 1:1 Jesus - the son of God
Revelation 3:12, 13 God - the almighty heavenly father

The context shows who is being referred to.

What are we really debating though. I think you have just created a pointless distraction, that I have no idea where you are going with it.
Other than it helps you to get away from having to deal with the fact that you have no answer for how you can reconcile Revelation 3:12, 13 with your belief.
That scriptures and others bury the trinity doctrine.
Obviously, you won't admit that will you?

Why can't you use scripture to dispute it?

 

[Thinking Homer]

We are created in the image of God, just as Jesus was. He is the image of God and we are created in God's image too. Not hard to imagine surely?

You are cherry-picking verses to give the appearance of a particular vantage point. However, you are forced to ignore the plethora of verses which explicitly distinguish the Son from God and even subjugate Jesus to God. Since your interpretation relies upon ignoring such verses - it is clearly inferior to an interpretation like my own that is able to legitimately accept all of these verses without contradiction. Jesus being called God by scripture is not a problem for my position - for many are called God who are not literally God themselves in scripture.

God is the only savior, because he alone has the power to save from Adamic death. Christ the true Messiah - was anointed by God to deliver mankind from this death.

If 'god', can mean anything, even out of context, which is your argument, then why are you saying that Jesus, isn't God? Why are you using a vague word to describe your specific deity, when your argument, is that it is a vague, name, and word?

He is our Savior, sent by Jehovah God. John 3:16(What if God hadn’t sent him?)

He’s also our King, again because God made him such.

I just want to thank everyone for a meaningful engagement in a highly complex topic such as the relationship between Jesus and Yahweh. I have included everyone who has been active thus far so that you can read what I have to say.

First of all, it is clear that the term “God” has been applied to many persons in the past:

'Then the Lord said to Moses, "See, I make you as God to Pharaoh, and your brother Aaron shall be your prophet. ' Exodus 7:1

'I said, "You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High.' Psalms 82:6


The question is, how literally do we take these statements? Obviously with regards to Moses and the Jewish people, we all understand that they were not God. But what about Jesus? In the Gospel of John and in the book of Hebrews, Jesus is called God on multiple occasions by different people.

'In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. ' John 1:1

'The Jews answered Him, "For a good work we do not stone You, but for blasphemy; and because You, being a man, make Yourself out to be God." ' John 10:33

'Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!" ' John 20:28

'But of the Son He says, " your throne , o God , is forever and ever , and the righteous scepter is the scepter of his kingdom .' Hebrews 1:8


Now the non-Trinitarians have been arguing that these are merely allegorical terms, and that it’s not to be taken literally. A strong point which they have been making is that Yahweh always places the Son below Him.

'For He has put all things in subjection under his feet . But when He says, "All things are put in subjection," it is evident that He is excepted who put all things in subjection to Him. When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all. ' 1 Corinthians 15:27-28

Just to be clear, Trinitarians do not see the Father and the Son as the same person. We see them as different persons, encapsulated into one entity known as “God”. What is clear from the above verse though is that we can create a hierarchy.

Yahweh

Son of God

Angels

Humans​

What has been missing from the conversation, however, is how to define this entity known as “God”, and how humans should relate to this “God”. As a monotheistic religion, it is clear that we should not worship any other except the “One true God”. This is evident from Scripture.

'"You shall have no other gods before Me. "You shall not make for yourself an idol, or any likeness of what is in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the water under the earth. You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, '
Exodus 20:3-5


What violates this command? The following verses give us an idea:

'When Peter entered, Cornelius met him, and fell at his feet and worshiped him. But Peter raised him up, saying, "Stand up; I too am just a man." ' Acts 10:25-26

'On an appointed day Herod, having put on his royal apparel, took his seat on the rostrum and began delivering an address to them. The people kept crying out, "The voice of a god and not of a man!" And immediately an angel of the Lord struck him because he did not give God the glory, and he was eaten by worms and died. ' Acts 12:21-23

'Then he said to me, "Write, 'Blessed are those who are invited to the marriage supper of the Lamb.'" And he said to me, "These are true words of God." Then I fell at his feet to worship him. But he said to me, "Do not do that; I am a fellow servant of yours and your brethren who hold the testimony of Jesus; worship God. For the testimony of Jesus is the spirit of prophecy." ' Revelation 19:9-10

'I, John, am the one who heard and saw these things. And when I heard and saw, I fell down to worship at the feet of the angel who showed me these things. But he said to me, "Do not do that. I am a fellow servant of yours and of your brethren the prophets and of those who heed the words of this book. Worship God." ' Revelation 22:8-9


Prostrating oneself and confessing divinity to an entity other than God seems to violate this command. This is true for both humans and angels. It seems worship is exclusive to the entity known as “God”. The Old Testament further emphasize this:

'"I have sworn by Myself, The word has gone forth from My mouth in righteousness And will not turn back, That to Me every knee will bow, every tongue will swear allegiance.' Isaiah 45:23

'Come, let us worship and bow down, Let us kneel before the Lord our Maker.' Psalms 95:6

'Let all those be ashamed who serve graven images, Who boast themselves of idols; Worship Him, all you gods.' Psalms 97:7


However in the New Testament we see the same command applied to Jesus:

'For this reason also, God highly exalted Him, and bestowed on Him the name which is above every name, so that at the name of Jesus every knee will bow, of those who are in heaven and on earth and under the earth, and that every tongue will confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. ' Philippians 2:9-11

'And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, " and let all the angels of God worship Him ."' Hebrews 1:6


The New Testament narrative seems to support this idea of worshiping Jesus:

'After coming into the house they saw the Child with Mary His mother; and they fell to the ground and worshiped Him. Then, opening their treasures, they presented to Him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. ' Matthew 2:11

'The crowds going ahead of Him, and those who followed, were shouting, "Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord ; Hosanna in the highest!" ' Matthew 21:9

'And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him. ' Matthew 28:9

'And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, "You are certainly God's Son!" ' Matthew 14:33

'And every created thing which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all things in them, I heard saying, "To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever." And the four living creatures kept saying, "Amen." And the elders fell down and worshiped. ' Revelation 5:13-14

Notice that Jesus never stops anyone from worshiping him.


The non-Trinitarians have been very adamant about separating the Son and God Almighty, so let’s do it for arguments sake. How do you relate to God, and how do you relate to the Son?


The Scriptures state that as human beings, we need to perform 3 functions:

1) We need to worship Yahweh (Psalms 95:6)

2) We need to worship Jesus (Philippians 2:10-11)

3) We must exclusively worship and serve Yahweh (Exodus 20:5)


Obviously it is not possible to do all 3 at once unless you ‘cherry-pick’ the verses that support your worldview. The Trinity doctrine provides a more consistent and coherent worldview, looking at the overall narrative throughout the entirety of the Bible. It distinguishes between purpose and nature, and the role that Jesus had on Earth as the Son of God. It is clear to me that what Hebrews 1:8-9 talks about is the anointing of Jesus as God by Yahweh, His God. Can there be two Gods? Of course not, there can be only One God. So when John writes that the ‘Logos’ was God, it seems it was not simply an allegorical statement, but a literal one.

 

[nPeace]

This is misleading, you, here.
The English usage of the name, and word, God, Biblically, follows a literal methodology, not a subjective one. Therefore, in the couple of instances, where the Greek, isn't matched, it does not change the methodology, they just used a different word.
The actual usage for Believers, follows the methodology.
God is a name, a name\title, and a word.
Used without descriptor, it means the "Biblical God." In other words, verses have to conform to this usage, in interpretation, because the usage is literal.
Note that, this is the The English usage of the Name, and word, God, that was chosen specifically to mean, the Biblical God.
The Biblical God, is a form being, who often sits on a Throne, and is accompanied by Angels, and Jesus.
The usage of the name God, is unified in the English usage, so that whether Abba, is used, or Jesus, is used, it means the same God. We could call it a pluralistic Godhead, unified in nature, and purpose, and, this is why it is called God.
Jehovah
&
Jesus
Share a Title. Lord. Although the title, Lord, is used, in both the Old Testament, and New Testament, trinitarians, or those believing in the Biblical God, usually specifiy as to which Lord, they are referring to. You don't have to specify, as they both mean, the Biblical God, however sometimes you would want to, for clarity.

Where is that in scripture, and what does that have to do with scripture?

 

[nPeace]

@Thinking Homer

The word proskuneó προσκυνέω is translated various ways - to do reverence to.
Defined - go down on my knees to, do obeisance to, worship

HE LPS Word-studies
4352 proskynéō (from 4314 /prós, "towards" and kyneo, "to kiss") – properly, to kiss the ground when prostrating before a superior; to worship, ready "to fall down/prostrate oneself to adore on one's knees" (DNTT); to "do obeisance" (BAGD).

["The basic meaning of 4352 (proskynéō), in the opinion of most scholars, is to kiss. . . . On Egyptian reliefs worshipers are represented with outstretched hand throwing a kiss to (pros-) the deity" (DNTT, 2, 875,876).

4352 (proskyneō) has been (metaphorically) described as "the kissing-ground" between believers (the Bride) and Christ (the heavenly Bridegroom). While this is true, 4352 (proskynéō) suggests the willingness to make all necessary physical gestures of obeisance.]


NAS Exhaustive Concordance
Word Origin
from pros and kuneó (to kiss)
Definition
to do reverence to
NASB Translation
bow down (1), bow down before (1), bowed down (1), bowed down before (2), bowing before (1), bowing down (1), prostrated himself before (1), worship (32), worshiped (17), worshipers (1), worshiping (1), worships (1).


Thayer's Greek Lexicon
STRONGS NT 4352: προσκυνέω

προσκυνέω, προσκύνω; imperfect προσεκύνουν; future προσκυνήσω; 1 aorist προσεκύνησα; from Aeschylus and Herodotus down; the Sept. very often for הִשְׁתַּחֲוָה (to prostrate oneself); properly, to kiss the hand to (toward) one, in token of reverence: Herodotus 1, 134; (cf. K. F. Hermann, Gottesdienstl. Alterthümer d. Griech. § 21; especially Hoelemann, Die Biblical Gestalt. d. Anbetung in his 'Bibelstudien' i., 106ff); hence, among the Orientals, especially the Persians, to fall upon the knees and touch the ground with the forehead as an expression of profound reverence ("to make a 'salam'"); Latinveneror (Nepos, Conon. 3, 3),adoro (Pliny, h. n. 28, 5, 25; Suetonius, Vitell. 2); hence, in the N. T. by kneeling or prostration to do homage (to one) or make obeisance, whether in order to express respect or to make supplication. It is used a. of homage shown to men of superior rank: absolutely,
Strong's Greek: 4352. προσκυνέω (proskuneó) -- to do reverence to

Obeisance — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
Many translations of this text here render proskyneoas “worship,” while some render it by such expressions as “bow before” (AT; Yg) and ‘pay homage’ (NE). No matter what English term is used, the original Greek remains the same and the understanding of what it is that the angels render to Christ must accord with the rest of the Scriptures. Jesus himself emphatically stated to Satan that “it is Jehovah your God you must worship [form of proskyneo], and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Mt 4:8-10; Lu 4:7, 8)

I think the point that needs to be taken into consideration, based on your hierarchy, is that if God is superior to Christ, then God alone receives worship, in the sense of the worship that is exclusive - unlike worship (obedience) that is given to any other, including men.

PS
Should have included this.
Why is Jesus given such homage?
Christ Jesus has been exalted by his Father to a position second only to God, so that “in the name of Jesus every knee should bend of those in heaven and those on earth and those under the ground, and every tongue should openly acknowledge that Jesus Christ is Lord to the glory of God the Father.” (Philippians 2:9-11; compare Daniel 7:13, 14, 27.)

 

[Hockeycowboy]

'And when He again brings the firstborn into the world, He says, " and let all the angels of God worship Him ."' Hebrews 1:6


The New Testament narrative seems to support this idea of worshiping Jesus:

'After coming into the house they saw the Child with Mary His mother; and they fell to the ground and worshiped Him. Then, opening their treasures, they presented to Him gifts of gold, frankincense, and myrrh. ' Matthew 2:11

'The crowds going ahead of Him, and those who followed, were shouting, "Hosanna to the Son of David; blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord ; Hosanna in the highest!" ' Matthew 21:9

'And behold, Jesus met them and greeted them. And they came up and took hold of His feet and worshiped Him. ' Matthew 28:9

'And those who were in the boat worshiped Him, saying, "You are certainly God's Son!" ' Matthew 14:33

'And every created thing which is in heaven and on the earth and under the earth and on the sea, and all things in them, I heard saying, "To Him who sits on the throne, and to the Lamb, be blessing and honor and glory and dominion forever and ever." And the four living creatures kept saying, "Amen." And the elders fell down and worshiped. ' Revelation 5:13-14

Notice that Jesus never stops anyone from worshiping him.

Those Scriptures do not really support your pov.

You are quoting the Scriptures that use the root word, "proskuneó." Are you aware the Gr Septuagint (LXX) uses proskuneo at Genesis 23:7, where it says Abraham "bows down" before the sons of Heth? Now, do you think Abraham was worshipping them, or was he just showing them honor?

The LXX also employs proskuneó in many other passages that apply to humans.

Proskuneo is the act of bowing down, prostrating oneself, indicating honoring someone or worshipping them. Context determines the intent.

Proskuneo is also applied to Jehovah, the Father and God of Jesus.

But another Gr root word, "latreuo," is always rendered worship or sacred service, and it is always exclusively applied to the Father.

Except for one instance, where God was saying others were offering worship to a false god. Acts 7

 

[iam1me]

Oh I see. The main reason why mainstream Christianity accept the Trinity is that it becomes very complicated if we don't place Jesus into the boundaries which we define as God. I have already given you the polytheistic argument.

The main reason why mainstream Christians accept the Trinity is because that is what they were taught - and 99% of those people will never seriously study theology; including the priests. They learn what their particular denomination has to say and they stick to it like glue. I mean, just look at all the evangelicals and how they fall into line behind Trump. They are brain-dead. And I say this as a Christian raised among these people.

You claim that Christ does not demand worship, but clearly that is not the case according to Scripture, which obviously becomes a problem.

You keep asserting this - but you have yet to show a single verse that calls for the worship of Christ as God.“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it."

At any rate,

You place Christ below the Father, and define Him as the Son of God which I also agree with. The problem for you is what to do with this entity known as the Son of God. You clearly believe in Him, you don't worship Him, you do not see Him as God Almighty. So what is Jesus to you exactly? Clearly He is the mediator between us and God, but do you just see Him as some kind of mechanism, or thing?

Btw I will get back to answering the points you raised earlier.

I don't see any problem here: Jesus is the only begotten Son of God, Lord and Savior, and the mediator between men and God.

 

[iam1me]

Prostrating oneself and confessing divinity to an entity other than God seems to violate this command. This is true for both humans and angels. It seems worship is exclusive to the entity known as “God”.

This is incorrect. Prostrating oneself before another as an act of honoring them is not, in of itself, worshiping someone as God. Also, I don't know too many Christians who practice prostration to begin with. However, historically, scripturally, prostrating oneself before another man was perfectly acceptable. Here's a good video on the topic:

The Scriptures state that as human beings, we need to perform 3 functions:

1) We need to worship Yahweh (Psalms 95:6)

2) We need to worship Jesus (Philippians 2:10-11)

3) We must exclusively worship and serve Yahweh (Exodus 20:5)


Obviously it is not possible to do all 3 at once unless you ‘cherry-pick’ the verses that support your worldview. The Trinity doctrine provides a more consistent and coherent worldview, looking at the overall narrative throughout the entirety of the Bible. It distinguishes between purpose and nature, and the role that Jesus had on Earth as the Son of God. It is clear to me that what Hebrews 1:8-9 talks about is the anointing of Jesus as God by Yahweh, His God. Can there be two Gods? Of course not, there can be only One God. So when John writes that the ‘Logos’ was God, it seems it was not simply an allegorical statement, but a literal one.

Phil 2 does not call for us to worship Jesus as God Almighty. Rather - as has been pointed out - Phil 2 even differentiates Jesus from God. At any rate, watch the above video, it will shake up your notion on what worship means.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

This is incorrect. Prostrating oneself before another as an act of honoring them is not, in of itself, worshiping someone as God. Also, I don't know too many Christians who practice prostration to begin with. However, historically, scripturally, prostrating oneself before another man was perfectly acceptable. Here's a good video on the topic:

Phil 2 does not call for us to worship Jesus as God Almighty. Rather - as has been pointed out - Phil 2 even differentiates Jesus from God. At any rate, watch the above video, it will shake up your notion on what worship means.

Nice

 

[Thinking Homer]

This is incorrect. Prostrating oneself before another as an act of honoring them is not, in of itself, worshiping someone as God. Also, I don't know too many Christians who practice prostration to begin with. However, historically, scripturally, prostrating oneself before another man was perfectly acceptable. Here's a good video on the topic:

The point is not the manner in which Christians worship, but that we are called to worship Jesus [in whatever shape or form it takes e.g. singing hymns]

It is true that people paid respect to other human beings (such as kings) but note that God never wanted this in the first place:
'But the thing was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, "Give us a king to judge us." And Samuel prayed to the Lord . The Lord said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them. ' 1 Samuel 8:6-7

Clearly God did not want another human being gaining the glory which He exclusively sought. My point is why would Yahweh then institute Jesus to be the object of worship over all of creation? It is one thing to allow humans to pay obeisance to you, it is another to call all of creation to worship you.

You argument thus far has been:
1. Jesus is not God because other humans have been called God
2. Jesus can be worshiped because other humans have been worshiped

What exactly is stopping a human from being classified as a God then? This is why I made a point that you need to have a clear boundary of what to define as God. The way and extent in which Jesus has been addressed in both the above aspects go way beyond simple obeisance or labeling of terms. One being that the 'Logos' is our creator:
'Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." ' Genesis 1:26

You have been very fixated on the humanity of Jesus, but have not really focused on his past or present existence. To compare worship between your creator and other humans as being the same thing, is far-fetched in my opinion.

Obeisance — Watchtower ONLINE LIBRARY
Many translations of this text here render proskyneoas “worship,” while some render it by such expressions as “bow before” (AT; Yg) and ‘pay homage’ (NE). No matter what English term is used, the original Greek remains the same and the understanding of what it is that the angels render to Christ must accord with the rest of the Scriptures. Jesus himself emphatically stated to Satan that “it is Jehovah your God you must worship [form of proskyneo], and it is to him alone you must render sacred service.” (Mt 4:8-10; Lu 4:7, 8)

I think the point that needs to be taken into consideration, based on your hierarchy, is that if God is superior to Christ, then God alone receives worship, in the sense of the worship that is exclusive - unlike worship (obedience) that is given to any other, including men.

Our perspective on the matter do not matter as much as to what the original NT writers intended to say. If they wanted to address worship to Jesus as simply paying homage or obeisance they could have used another Greek word: ypakoí. Instead they decided to use the word: proskuneo, to address worship to Jesus, the same word which Jesus used when he said: "Go, Satan! For it is written, 'you shall worship (proskuneo) the Lord your God, and serve him only.'" ' Matthew 4:10

It is also important to mention that the New World Translation is very biased with its translation in this regard. Whenever proskuneo/prosekunhsan is used for Yahweh, it is translated as 'worship' (Rev 5:14, 7:11, 11:16, 19:4, Jn 4:20), but when proskuneo/prosekunhsan is used for Jesus it is translated as 'obeisance' (Mt 14:33, 28:9, 28:17, Lk 24:52, Heb 1:6). I highly recommend switching to the NASB version as it is more consistent in its translation between Greek and English.

Please check the original Greek for yourself:
Matthew 1 Interlinear Bible

 

[iam1me]

The point is not the manner in which Christians worship, but that we are called to worship Jesus [in whatever shape or form it takes e.g. singing hymns]

Your position hinges upon the idea that all you have to do is show he receives praise/worship/honor and that that somehow proves he is God Almighty himself. This is simply not the case. It is perfectly legitimate to praise/worship/honor those who are not God Almighty.

It is true that people paid respect to other human beings (such as kings) but note that God never wanted this in the first place:
'But the thing was displeasing in the sight of Samuel when they said, "Give us a king to judge us." And Samuel prayed to the Lord . The Lord said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them. ' 1 Samuel 8:6-7

Clearly God did not want another human being gaining the glory which He exclusively sought. My point is why would Yahweh then institute Jesus to be the object of worship over all of creation? It is one thing to allow humans to pay obeisance to you, it is another to call all of creation to worship you.

God didn't desire it originally - but he permitted it. And, in fact, Jesus is King. Even if he weren't, however, his role as Savior would more than be sufficient for praise and honor in and of itself. Also - God's issue with a King had nothing to do with honor/praise. You don't get to blindly assert such things.

You argument thus far has been:
1. Jesus is not God because other humans have been called God
2. Jesus can be worshiped because other humans have been worshiped

What exactly is stopping a human from being classified as a God then? This is why I made a point that you need to have a clear boundary of what to define as God. The way and extent in which Jesus has been addressed in both the above aspects go way beyond simple obeisance or labeling of terms. One being that the 'Logos' is our creator:
'Then God said, "Let Us make man in Our image, according to Our likeness; and let them rule over the fish of the sea and over the birds of the sky and over the cattle and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps on the earth." ' Genesis 1:26

You have been very fixated on the humanity of Jesus, but have not really focused on his past or present existence. To compare worship between your creator and other humans as being the same thing, is far-fetched in my opinion.

"God" is a title that reflects a relationship between two parties. This is why when the Almighty establishes the covenants he says something along the lines of "You will by my people, and I will be your God" (exact wording differs a little bit with the various covenants). This is also why scripture is able to talk about Jesus' God (Your God) while simultaneously addressing Jesus as God. This is why God says of Moses: I make you as God to Pharaoh. This is why angels, acting as God's representatives in the OT, are directly addressed as if God himself. This is why the Jewish people are called gods.

Scripture doesn't come out and give an explicit definition for what the term means precisely, so it must be inferred from context. And we see a clear pattern in the above cases: the term not only applies to God Almighty, but also to those who serve God as his agents and mediators - those who carry out his will. And this fits who Jesus is perfectly - he was sent by God to carry out his will and save us, and he serves as God's representative and mediator to men, sitting at God's right hand.

You are invested in making this more complicated than it needs to be - but unless you can demonstrate that the above usage doesn't apply to Christ, that a different connotation of the term is what is intended, then you simply don't have a case. You have tried from many different angles - but none of them have held up under scrutiny.

Our perspective on the matter do not matter as much as to what the original NT writers intended to say. If they wanted to address worship to Jesus as simply paying homage or obeisance they could have used another Greek word: ypakoí. Instead they decided to use the word: proskuneo, to address worship to Jesus, the same word which Jesus used when he said: "Go, Satan! For it is written, 'you shall worship (proskuneo) the Lord your God, and serve him only.'" ' Matthew 4:10

It is also important to mention that the New World Translation is very biased with its translation in this regard. Whenever proskuneo/prosekunhsan is used for Yahweh, it is translated as 'worship' (Rev 5:14, 7:11, 11:16, 19:4, Jn 4:20), but when proskuneo/prosekunhsan is used for Jesus it is translated as 'obeisance' (Mt 14:33, 28:9, 28:17, Lk 24:52, Heb 1:6). I highly recommend switching to the NASB version as it is more consistent in its translation between Greek and English.

Please check the original Greek for yourself:
Matthew 1 Interlinear Bible

The scriptures says that you are to serve God alone. The do not say that you are to worship God alone. As far as the translators choosing how to translate the same word differently depending upon who it is applied to - that is a repeat of what is noted in the video I provided you. The translators are choosing different words to give a certain impression - but when you get down to it, the same word that is translated as worship for God may also be applied to men - and it is.

 

[Thinking Homer]

Your position hinges upon the idea that all you have to do is show he receives praise/worship/honor and that that somehow proves he is God Almighty himself. This is simply not the case. It is perfectly legitimate to praise/worship/honor those who are not God Almighty.

Again not the point I'm trying to make. I'm trying to qualify the degree of worship which Jesus received compared to other human beings. It is clearly not on the same level as human beings (worshiped by angels and humans, and all of creation). Why would Yahweh allow such a thing?

Also - God's issue with a King had nothing to do with honor/praise. You don't get to blindly assert such things.

Of course it did. It was Israel's clear rebellion and rejection that Yahweh was their ultimate King.

'The Lord said to Samuel, "Listen to the voice of the people in regard to all that they say to you, for they have not rejected you, but they have rejected Me from being king over them. ' 1 Samuel 8:7

It was never Yahweh's intention to have a mediator between Himself and His people. However Yahweh does not have a problem with Jesus being the mediator. Yahweh is fine with Jesus claiming Kingship.

'These will wage war against the Lamb, and the Lamb will overcome them, because He is Lord of lords and King of kings, and those who are with Him are the called and chosen and faithful." ' Revelation 17:14

The title Lord of lords and King of kings obviously belongs to Yahweh, so why would they refer this to Jesus?

"God" is a title that reflects a relationship between two parties. This is why when the Almighty establishes the covenants he says something along the lines of "You will by my people, and I will be your God" (exact wording differs a little bit with the various covenants). This is also why scripture is able to talk about Jesus' God (Your God) while simultaneously addressing Jesus as God. This is why God says of Moses: I make you as God to Pharaoh. This is why angels, acting as God's representatives in the OT, are directly addressed as if God himself. This is why the Jewish people are called gods.

Did Jesus not also establish the covenant between Himself and humans? (Something only God could do?)
'for this is My blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for forgiveness of sins. ' Matthew 26:28

If you are saying that Yahweh calling Jesus 'Your God' reflects the forming of a covenant, whose point are you exactly proving? Mine or yours? Whenever God forms a covenant, He always makes a clear distinction between the two parties: I am God, you are people.

'Then I will take you for My people, and I will be your God; and you shall know that I am the Lord your God, who brought you out from under the burdens of the Egyptians. ' Exodus 6:7

However that that does not seem to be the case between Yahweh and Jesus, where Yahweh addresses Him as God and acknowledges His throne.

The passage with Moses and the Jewish people have nothing to do with forming a covenant. (Nor does it fit these under any of the covenants: Abrahamic, Noahic, Mosaic etc)

You are invested in making this more complicated than it needs to be - but unless you can demonstrate that the above usage doesn't apply to Christ, that a different connotation of the term is what is intended, then you simply don't have a case. You have tried from many different angles - but none of them have held up under scrutiny.

You seem to be dodging the question, and you still haven't given me a solid argument of why worshiping two entities do not violate the monotheistic belief system. The arguments that I have been hearing is conveniently substituting the word 'worship' with 'obeisance' which the New Testament writers never intended; and justifying worship of Jesus as being the same as that of humans.

The worship of Jesus is on a completely different scale (read Revelation). It is actually on the same level as that of Yahweh. The burden of proof is on you to show me that it is different. Humans/angels were never worshiped by all of creation like Jesus has. Only Yahweh deserves this position.

The scriptures says that you are to serve God alone. The do not say that you are to worship God alone.

'You shall not worship them or serve them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children, on the third and the fourth generations of those who hate Me, ' Exodus 20:5

For simplicity sake, one could define God as:
1) An entity who has authority over all creation
2) An entity who lies outside boundaries of space and time

Jesus falls under both categories. What category would you add to say that Jesus is not God?